#Hosch250

A question is flagged: Please delete this question - my boss has seen it and says it contains confidential code - he's freaking out and wants me to remove it, but I can't delete it. The question was asked 3 days before, it has 2 answers, one is accepted. How do you respond?

Sensitive posts are a serious legal issue with Code Review. On many other sites, anonymizing the code and removing sensitive information would be more possible than on Code Review, where we require the original, working code.

The first step I would take is to attempt to contact the boss and see if he could explain what is wrong with the post and if there is a possible acceptable compromise, or if the entire post is sensitive and should be removed.

In the event a compromise is not possible, I would delete the post and request a CM completely remove it. Legally, I cannot do otherwise - the content was illegally licensed to SE by someone who did not have the authority to do so.

If I am able to reach an acceptable compromise (such as removing a section of code not discussed in any answers), I would edit the post and request a CM remove the revision history to prevent future visitors from seeing it.

What do you think about the new possibilities of migration coming with graduation? Graduation means we will get the ability to migrate questions away by community vote. It also means we may end up on the migration path of other sites. These user-migrations can be notoriously bad (see the old programmer's dilemma). I personally fear they will be. This means an additional moderation duty and quite possibly drama with other sites on the network... How would you address problems coming up with large-scale low-quality user migrations?

First of all, we have @Duga to help us catch comments suggesting migrations from SO, and have been fairly successful in educating SO users before they migrate bad posts. Duga will be a very valuable tool for aiding in this situation, and I intend to use her to her full potential.

However, this will likely be a real attention-demanding issue. In this case, I would leave a comment explaining what was wrong with the post, notifying the migration voters, and explain to the OP how they could make their question suitable for Code Review if they wish to leave it up for review, and point them to the help center for future reference. Education and patience is our best weapon here.

As a moderator on Code Review you will also become a moderator on all of chat.stackexchange.com - which has rooms for most sites (all except Stack Overflow and Meta.StackExchange). A heated discussion is flagged in "The Suspension" chat room which is associated with BridgeBuilding.stackexchange.com - there is swearing and name calling. What do you do?

First of all, remain calm. As a moderator, we must not aggravate the issue.

In response to this, I will read the log and remove any offensive and threatening posts.

Next, if there are site mods in the room addressing the issue, I will remain as support only, and not interfere.

If there are no site mods handling the situation and one person is clearly being a troll or otherwise deserves to be kicked and/or suspended and/or banned, I will do so and stay in the room until it is clear the issue is solved, including until after the limit of any suspension to ensure no users come back and start making trouble again, in which case a ban may be necessary.

Depending on how bad the situation is, I may need to temporarily lock the room so no one but moderators can talk to let everyone cool down a bit, leaving a comment as to why I took the action and what I expect of the users when the room is unlocked.

A user has an issue with an action you, as moderator, took; calling you out on meta, a chat room, comments, or otherwise. How do you handle this?

I would calmly explain why I took the issue, and listen to the user's complaint. If I decide I was in the wrong, I will revert my action, if possible, and apologize. If I feel I was in the right, I will invite the user to post on meta, answer the meta question with my explanation, and let the community decide between us, accepting the community's decision and taking action based on it.

How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

I would notify the user that the issue has come to the moderators' attention, and ask if they could try to keep the comments more polite. Depending on the user's reaction and future behavior, I may need to give them a moderator warning, and perhaps a suspension. As a moderator, I need to guard the health of the site, and regular arguments and flags caused by a certain user cannot be allowed.

How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

I would privately contact the mod and ask them if they would mind explaining why they took that specific action on that post. We should be able to work any disagreements out privately. If I still completely disagree with the action after the explanation, I will post question on meta being polite and not mentioning any names to discuss the issue, and apologize to the other mod if my disagreement is wrong.

"Moderators don't vote. They decide." Making binding decisions instead of voting will be a paradigm shift for nearly all of the nominees. How do you plan on making this adjustment?

I have handled the switch from having to flag for off-topic posts and having my flags reviewed by the community and moderators to having the outright freedom of voting to close. I have handled the switch from having my edits reviewed to having full freedom over my edits. I currently have full privileges on the site, and have for a while. Becoming a moderator will be an adjustment, but adjustments and learning are commonplace with me between learning programming and college, so it will be nothing new.

In the event I make a mistake, I will apologize to the user, and remember my mistake for the next time.

As one of the Revivalists, I have seen some users come through chat that are active and excited about Code Review, and they do well for months at a time, but then they drop off the face of the planet Code Review, sometimes they come back and some haven't come back yet. Are you in it for the long haul? Are you going to stick with us for the long haul? Are you ready to spend hours on Code Review, just for the love of the site? Are you Addicted to Code Review? How can you show us that you are serious about Code Review?

Yes, I am in Code Review for the long haul - I have no other way to get feedback about my code, and I am active in Rubberduck, the VBE add-in, which is coordinated through GitHub and Code Review.

I already do spend hours on CR - I usually have CR open on a second tab on my laptop all day, and am on my computer for several hours each day. Being an online college student helps with this as I have to interact with my university on my computer, therefore giving me a good reason to be on it a lot.

Am I addicted to Code Review? I have to say that I'm about as addicted to Code Review as I am to anything else. Logging in to CR is the first thing I do when I get on my computer, and closing my CR browser tab is the last thing I do before I get off each night.

Code Review has approximately at 15-to-1 upvote-to-downvote ratio, nearly double Stack Overflow's approximate 8-to-1 ratio. As a moderator, you'll be regularly viewing the worst of the worst posts made to Code Review. Do you consider up and down voting of a moderation tool at all? Do you think you downvote enough questions? Do you think you upvote enough questions?

I am one of Code Review's biggest upvoters, with 4746 upvotes and 7 downvotes (I have downvoted other, now removed, posts). When I first joined, it was the friendliness of CR that made me stick around, and no matter how big we are, there is always at least one more person we can help.

I do believe I upvote enough questions, having almost as many question upvotes as answer upvotes. I should downvote generally poor quality posts more, but much of the time, I feel going right to the final action (removing a post, or converting it into a comment) without the intermediary downvote is strong enough. Maybe that is because it probably would be strong enough with me.

In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

Being a moderator will put me directly in the middle of many issues that I could avoid as a normal user. I will have more responsibility to maintain the health of the site, and the ability to handle flags directly. By becoming a moderator, I will essentially be accepting a front-line battle position to help keep Code Review healthily active and strong. As a normal user, I don't have any requirements to help moderate the site, although I have moderation tools available at higher reputation levels. As a moderator, I will have to actively moderate the site, including training new users, removing bad and offensive content, and more. Essentially, as a normal user, I only am responsible for my conduct; as a moderator, I am responsible for handling and correcting all bad conduct and actions.